While it's a fireable offense, my experience with senior management has been that the company is more than happy to help cover it up for them... until they do a bad, and then it becomes a quick ticket to can them without having to admit the real reason for canning them.

▲

Starman_Jones a day ago | parent | next [-]

Seems like that could actually map pretty well to this case.

▲

hackeraccount a day ago | parent | prev [-]

That's what everyone keeps saying. INAL but that would give any fired executive hella leverage when the board finally decide to unveil what they've been hiding. I mean, they'll go to discovery and ... perjure themselves? Really?

▲

jcranmer a day ago | parent [-]

What claim would the executive have? They can be fired by the board for any reason (except for a few explicitly prohibited reasons), so "they lied about why they fired me" doesn't work as a claim unless you're alleging the real reason is because they're racist or something similar.

▲

hackeraccount 21 hours ago | parent [-]

The problem would be they'd depose the board and ask when they knew about it. The board member would say, yeah, we've known for a few months but we'd figure we'd just sit on it and see how it played out. I don't know how these things work but that sounds more like the act of an accomplice then anything else.

	▲	jcranmer 21 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Depositions happen after the motion to dismiss, which is where you assess "even if the facts you allege are true, you have no case." And "we've known about it for months before we did something about it" isn't enough to get you to an unjust firing.